Reflections on Advisory Groups: A Powerful Engagement Tool for Inclusive and Complex Decision-Making

Engagement, General, Insights

Shairose Ukanji

advisory groups

Having recently completed the IAP2 Certificate at the in-person program in Vancouver, I’ve developed a deep appreciation for the power of Advisory Groups as an engagement method. They’ve emerged for me as more than just a way to gather input—they’re a dynamic method for bringing together diverse perspectives and navigating the complexities of decision-making. What truly resonated from the course was their pivotal role in building collaboration and trust and fostering informed decisions, especially when dealing with contentious or intricate issues that require sustained engagement.

What Exactly Are Advisory Groups?

Advisory groups are small, carefully selected groups that meet over time with a specific goal or scope of work. They provide advice, offer feedback, and help shape decisions. Unlike one-off meetings or consultations, advisory groups meet regularly, allowing members to gain a deep understanding of the issue and build a relationship with decision-makers and staff.

These groups consist of representatives from various sectors, communities, and interests—selected to ensure that different perspectives are at the table. The goal is not to randomly gather input, but to bring together a cross-section of interested parties who can help an organization or agency make more informed decisions over time.

You might hear different terms like “advisory committees,” “task forces,” or “working groups” used interchangeably with advisory groups. While the names can vary depending on the context, the goal is the same: to provide consistent, structured input that helps inform decision-making.

When and Why to Use Advisory Groups

One of the most interesting insights from the course was learning when advisory groups are particularly effective. Here’s when they tend to work best:

  • When multiple perspectives are needed: Complex issues often require input from diverse voices. Advisory groups can offer expertise, local knowledge, and varying viewpoints, creating a more well-rounded understanding of the problem at hand.
  • When decisions are controversial: If an organization or agency is struggling to move forward due to public pushback or controversy, an advisory group can help by building trust and offering a space for constructive dialogue. The sustained engagement often leads to more community buy-in.
  • To serve as a communication channel: Advisory groups provide a steady, reliable flow of communication between the decision-maker and the community. This allows for ongoing updates and feedback, making the process more transparent.
  • To ease “consultation fatigue”: When the public feels overwhelmed by constant consultations on a range of issues, advisory groups can step in as a more focused and efficient method for ongoing input.

Challenges and Considerations

While advisory groups offer many advantages, they are not without challenges. These groups can be difficult to manage if there is no clear purpose or if the decision-maker doesn’t take their advice seriously. A group’s effectiveness is often measured by how useful its advice is to the decision-maker, but it’s important to remember that the ultimate goal is not necessarily to make the decision easier—rather, it’s to reflect the broad range of diverse perspectives. Another potential issue is achieving consensus. If an advisory group is too divided or unable to reach an agreement on key issues, its value to the decision-maker can diminish.

Key Learnings and Best Practices

Here are some of the key takeaways I found particularly valuable:

  1. Clarity of Purpose: The success of an advisory group hinges on a clear understanding of its role. Members need to know why they’ve been convened, what they are advising on, and what outcomes are expected. Without this clarity, discussions can easily become unfocused and unproductive.
  2. Diverse Representation: Advisory groups should reflect the diversity of the community or groups affected by the decision. This is critical not only for the quality of the input but also for the group’s credibility with the broader public. Bringing together people with different experiences ensures that discussions cover all angles and potential impacts.
  3. Ongoing Engagement: Unlike one-off meetings, advisory groups meet regularly over time. This sustained engagement is crucial because it allows members to dig deeper into issues, understand the nuances, and provide more informed advice. Over time, group members also develop stronger relationships with each other and with the decision-maker, creating a more collaborative environment.
  4. Maintaining Autonomy: A particularly important lesson was that advisory groups need to maintain their independence from the organization they are advising. If members start thinking too much like the organization, they risk losing their ability to provide authentic public perspectives.

Advisory Groups in Action

Over the last several months, I gained first-hand insight into the effectiveness of advisory groups as a robust engagement method through a current project. In this case, a municipality brought together a diverse group of event planners to identify key challenges and opportunities for improvement in event planning and execution. The goal is to explore how barriers can be removed and processes streamlined to cut unnecessary red tape. What makes this approach particularly valuable is that every member of the advisory group clearly understands the purpose of their participation and how their input will directly shape the outcomes.

Share this post